Learning about Common Core

This school year, the Common Core State Standards have become one of the most important topics in K-12 education. Business groups, teachers, parents, higher education officials and policymakers continue to weigh in about what the more rigorous standards mean for classrooms.

Supporters have said Common Core will better prepare students for college and career success, and put American students on a more level playing field with students from other countries. Opponents worry that the implementation has been rushed, teachers aren’t adequately prepared and the adjustment might be “too much, too soon” for some students.

It’s a big topic, and one that lends itself to a multitude of stories in the coming months. I’m excited to say that next week, I’m heading to Washington, D.C. for a seminar, “Common Core at the Crossroads: What Comes Next?” Hosted by the Education Writers Association, the seminar will address Common Core on several fronts. The scheduled sessions include discussions on the Common Core rollout, challenges currently facing states, the associated PARCC assessments, as well as teacher-led math and English Language Arts lessons.

I applied for the seminar on a whim a couple of weeks ago. I was happily surprised and thankful when I received word from EWA that I had received a scholarship to attend. The seminar only lasts for one day, so I know it will be intense, but well worth the time and effort. I’m so excited about the chance to talk with other education reporters, and hear from people across the country who are on the front lines when it comes to this important topic.

As time allows, I’ll be tweeting about my travels and what I’m learning on my Twitter account, @TDAMcElfresh. Feel free to follow, share your input and give me some ideas for coverage. You can also reach me anytime at amcelfresh@theadvertiser.com or 337-289-6373.

6 Responses to Learning about Common Core

First, I’d ask for the empirical data proving that common core, specifically, generates test results that are statistically superior to those now being achieved. Who has used it, for how long, and what were their scores, before and after ?

I have yet to see any such proof. This “solution” seems to be an untested, unproven reworking of curricula, with no verifiable results justifying the chaos it has created in Lafayette Parish.

Second, it is the fault of the central office that there was no curricula generated to meet core standards, which has been the bane of every classroom teacher in Lafayette. These folks get paid big bucks to oversee subject matter curricula parishwide, and they did absolutely nothing to produce local curricula to distribute to teachers. One week before class began, they threw the Engage New York curricula at teachers, without any training, supporting materials or proof that this approach would work in this parish.

It has been a disaster, and kids will fail the Leap tests in droves because of this lack of effort from “administrators” in the central office. Engage New York is completely useless here, where the lesson plans, terminology and grade level material is utterly incompatible with existing performance standards, knowledge bases of students, and nature of the English and social studies materials utilized in New York. Much of the latter is age-inappropriate, brazenly “progressive” in theme and content, and openly dismissive of both the free market system and traditional social and religious values — which may be fine in New York, but not what parents in Lafayette expect to be taught in taxpayer funded classrooms.

No effort went into the creation of seamless practical curricula to meet core standards or to insure that there were no lapses in what students knew, before they were expected to meet standards of students who had been using the core for several years.

Poor performance by the people in the central office, but teachers and kids were left holding the bag.

Finally, the legislature is hearing from parents and teachers and will, hopefully, assign common core to the waste bin.

The primary fallacy upon which the core agenda is premised is that, if you don’t adopt the core, nothing else you could do will raise performance levels in schools.

Of course, this is nonsense, but continues to go largely unchallenged. And, as noted, there are no studies proving the core raises test scores, compared to what was being done previously, or that some other combination of changes could not achieve the desired increases, or better.

It’s “rigorous”. If I hear that about the core again, my head will explode ! What the heck does that mean ? How about teaching post-graduate curricula, in Chinese, to every grade level. That would be plenty rigorous, right ? Rigorous, rigorous, rigorous — how can supposedly-intelligent people be so mesmerized by this dollar-store, bumper sticker slogan?

These pro-core zombies live in another dimension, and the’ve dragged much of the education establishment in, with them. They spout this nonsense like they’re quoting the Bible, and everyone is expected to say, “Oh, well, since they say it’s rigorous, we better use it, or our kids will all fail.” It’s impossible to have a rational discussion with a tape recorder, looping the same meaningless slogans over and over and over.

PROVE the core has worked to produce the miracles you say it will. Show us the scores !

BESE is demanding schools keep Engage NY curricula. (A skunk, by any other name …) Problem UNSOLVED ! The drama will continue. It is junk-math, left-coast, anti-family, anti-US, anti-capitalist, social studies, and not shown to raise test scores. Proving once again that a gigantic mud slide is hard to stop, even if the poor schmucks at the bottom see it coming.

Mediation ? How about the Super. and Board stop airing their differences in public and get together behind closed doors, like adults?

The Super. and Board do not have to agree on everything, or even like each other. But they do have to get together on the basics, stop the public, personal attacks, and get the details worked out in private, on the big things.

A board meeting should not include any surprises, name calling or roadblocks to voting on important matters, which need to be resolved so the system can move on.

No one can win on every issue, which seems to be the holdup, at this point. How about giving a little here an there, and you might find things easier on matters that are important to you ?

And this “Act 1” stuff has to stop. The statute is unclear on several major points. Seeking legal advice on something open to interpretation is a waste of money. It’s no more that someone sending you a big fat bill for reading tea leaves. Agree on how the Super. and Board will deal with personnel and other matters, and go on to something else.

We’ve got to stop arguing over turf and style and take care of the business of running the school system.

Request someone else from the DA’s office be appointed to represent the system, if you feel the current attorney did not fairly represent the interests of his client. (Do so in private, through the DA, not in the press.)

Now the Super. has filed an “ethics” complaint against Mark Babineaux, at the same time pleading for “mediation”?

First, Mr. Babineaux was not acting as an attorney during the closed session, nor was he representing anyone as an attorney at the time. Accordingly, there is no basis for a claim alleging that he acted “unprofessionally.” Dr. Cooper could easily have found this out, himself, had he bothered to check. Rather than serve any useful end, this appears to be a purely vindictive act on the superintendent’s part, designed solely to embarrass Mr. Babineaux.

Furthermore, as the Super. has just signed a declaration of war against the Board, you can kiss any “mediation” goodbye. Instead, he’s likely to find the stalled investigation into his payroll and administrative practices proceeding full steam ahead, with the legal costs coming out of his own pocket. (Since the Board is not likely to approve payment.)

I don’t get it. It seems Dr. Cooper thinks the Board works for him, rather than the other way around. If you had an employee who repeatedly disrespeted you in public, refused to obey direct orders regarding the spending of your money, went behind your back to undermine your directives and your credibility, and called you out, personally, on local TV and in the media, when you objected to his actions, how long would it take for you to throw him off your premises ?

Dr. Cooper just likely wrote off the entire remainder of his tenure as parish superintendent. He will accomplish ZERO, now that he has backhanded the Board, which will have no alternative but to respond in kind. Any cooperation which might have been possible appears lost, destroyed by this pointless act of hubris.

Does any of this seem familiar ? Until we hire someone from Acadiana to run our school system, with a permanent commitment to the people and students of Lafayette Parish, this type of chaos will continue.